On Wednesday, 12 March, the European Parliament adopted a resolution aimed at reaffirming and strengthening the European Union’s (EU) support for Ukraine, after three years of war and while Donald Trump’s convoluted positions create uncertainty in the eastern part of the continent.

The numerous hours of plenary session devoted to the “Rearm Europe” plan announced by the European Commission – derogations from debt and deficit criteria for defence investments and loans – allowed the majority of MEPs to praise this European defence plan, whilst regretting that it was “too little, too late”.

The presentation of the “white paper” on the future of European defence, a programme by the new European Commissioner Andrius Kubilius, and discussions on the need to intensify aid to Ukraine nevertheless revealed fracture lines beneath the apparent consensus on the necessity of a militarily stronger Europe in the face of US disengagement.

“Together, we have the necessary size, economic power and now the political will to deter any enemy,” thundered the President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, in her introduction, insisting that the summit of 6 March was “only a starting point”: “The time for illusions is over. We need an increase in European defence, and we need it now.”

In her wake, and after castigating Donald Trump’s attitude towards Volodymyr Zelensky – “a scandal” – the leader of the European People’s Party (EPP, right-wing) group dreamed of a “real European defence” with common projects to end dependency on the United States. “We need a cyber-defence brigade, a satellite surveillance system...”, enumerated the German conservative Manfred Weber. “I would like to see troops with a European flag on their uniforms.”

The Far Right Torn Apart

Speeches followed one another to emphasise the dual necessity of common defence and support for Ukraine – “two sides of the same coin” according to socialist Iratxe Garcia Pérez – and to express concern about Donald Trump’s attitude. “The White House is no longer our ally,” said Macronist MEP Valérie Hayer sharply, pointing to attacks “on our democratic model” coming from the United States and Russia. “Russia is directly threatening us and the USA is cowardly abandoning us,” added socialist Raphaël Glucksmann, who called for “going further” than Ursula von der Leyen’s announcements.

The Left group, which includes elected members of La France insoumise (LFI), was the only one on the left to denounce “a warmongering madness” that risks leading to more austerity on the continent, but also the only one to regret that the 800 billion of the plan to rearm Europe were not allocated to defending public services or increasing wages. “NATO is consigned to the dustbin of history,” declared German MEP Martin Schirdewan. “We need a different architecture where diplomacy will always take precedence over military solutions.”

European far-right parties displayed their ambiguities and disagreements throughout the plenary session. While Jordan Bardella insisted on the need to guarantee Ukraine’s security “so that it never again suffers the assaults of the Russian aggressor”, and hammered home at a press conference that “Russia cannot obtain through peace what it has not obtained through war”, his ally in the Patriots for Europe (PfE) group, Hungarian Kinga Gál, stated: “Strengthening European defence must not be linked to increased aid to Ukraine.”

Viktor Orbán’s Hungary is the only country that refused to sign part of the conclusions of the European summit on 6 March, which precisely concerned support for Ukraine. Within the PfE group, the connections of several parties with Vladimir Putin’s Russia and the almost generalised fascination with Donald Trump caused a certain cacophony in the ranks of the European far right.

“Have you seen the state of Paris, the traffic... Tanks are not about to enter Paris.” - Jordan Bardella

“Trump will create peace, period,” thundered Hungarian Tamás Deutsch, soon joined by members of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group of the very Atlanticist Giorgia Meloni, whose representative in Strasbourg repeated that “European defence cannot detach itself from NATO and the USA”. This vision is far from that claimed by the National Rally (RN), whose representative Pierre-Romain Thionnet advocated for European independence and non-alignment: “We want neither a Russian Europe, nor a Europe barbarised by Islamism, but nor do we want an American Europe.”

The debates also illustrated two visions of Vladimir Putin’s Russia. “We must prepare for a war against Russia at very short notice,” warned Lithuanian EPP MEP Rasa Juknevičienė, joined by representatives of the socialist and liberal groups, who hammered home the “direct” threat that Russia poses to European interests.

Conversely, representatives of far-right groups competed in euphemising the reality of the Russian threat. “Russian tanks are not in Warsaw or Budapest, Paris is not burning. What’s burning in France are Christian churches, that’s the real emergency,” declared Italian MEP Roberto Vannacci, an ally of the RN. “You present Russia as being an enemy. Why would Russia want to invade us, we have nothing but debts!” joked his German colleague Petr Bystron, a member of Alternative for Germany (AfD), who is under investigation on suspicion of having been paid by Russia.

The talking point was also found in the speeches of other elected officials, from Belgian Marc Botenga, a member of The Left group – “Russia cannot conquer Ukraine. Before they reach the Grand Place in Brussels, there’s a long way to go” – to German Fabio De Masi (Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance) – “Russia is breaking its teeth in Ukraine, they’re not going to reach the Brandenburg Gate”.

The RN Abstains, Its Allies Vote Against

Jordan Bardella himself displays a shifting position on the issue. When questioned by journalists, he first chose to be ironic about the threat: “Have you seen the state of Paris, the traffic... Tanks are not about to enter Paris.” A position that aligns with that taken by Marine Le Pen in Le Figaro when she stated: “If, after three years, Russia is struggling to advance in Ukraine, there is little chance that it aspires to come all the way to Paris.”

Just a few minutes after his ironic remark, however, Jordan Bardella acknowledged that he did not know how far the Russian president was prepared to go in his threat towards Europe: “He has repeatedly violated ceasefires and agreements previously signed by Russia. What will he do tomorrow and the day after? I haven’t the faintest idea,” said the man who had described Russia at the beginning of the week as a “multidimensional threat to France and European interests”.

Unsurprisingly, Parliament eventually adopted by a large majority the resolution reaffirming support for Ukraine, after adding a paragraph expressing satisfaction with the announcement of an agreement between Ukraine and the United States. Signed by five political groups, this text did not receive the votes of the LFI or RN groups, who preferred to abstain or vote against, to protest several points.

Facing journalists the day before, Jordan Bardella had justified his abstention by his opposition to “the desire to accelerate and further increase arms deliveries to Ukraine”, his refusal to support the process of Ukraine’s entry into the EU or NATO, or the possibility of using frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine.

In detail, the Patriots for Europe group was split between abstention and voting against: the French RN members, the largest contingent in terms of number of MEPs, abstained, while their Italian, Hungarian or Austrian allies, who stand by their benevolence towards Russia and their admiration for Trump, voted against.

Giorgia Meloni’s ECR group was also divided, even though some of its members had co-signed the resolution text: the Italians abstained while the Poles and representatives of the Baltic states, who are in close proximity to Russian expansionist desires, supported the resolution.

Youmni Kezzouf

Click here to subscribe to ESSF newsletters in English and or French.